After sharp public criticism, council votes to deny proposed raise for mayor and council
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Sign Up FreeSummary
A public hearing on an ordinance to increase the mayor's and council members' salaries drew broad public comment; councilmember Smith withdrew the item and a substitute motion to deny passed unanimously (9-0).
Council opened a public hearing on an ordinance proposing increased salaries for the mayor and city council effective July 1, 2027, and heard nine registered speakers during a lengthy public-comment period.
Opponents argued the timing was poor amid rising costs for residents. Jennifer Economy said residents are "struggling to make ends meet" and urged council to "put the city's economy and its people first." Brad Moore and others warned the increase would appear tone-deaf following larger state legislative pay changes.
Supporters said higher pay could broaden who can serve. Cliff Randolph, who introduced himself as a Chesapeake resident, told council: "I support your going ahead with raising your compensation for city council members," arguing the role requires significant unpaid time and casework.
After public comments Councilmember Les Smith moved to withdraw the item for later reconsideration; a substitute motion to deny the ordinance was offered and carried by a nine-zero vote. Several council members said they support the principle of reasonable compensation but opposed this particular proposal because of timing and scale. Councilmember Smith said the issue is "about removing a barrier" to service but accepted that the public reaction requires more study and perhaps a more gradual approach.
The denial means no change will take effect; if council pursues any future pay changes they must re-advertise and hold a new public hearing. Council requested staff and members consider studies and phased options that would examine regional comparators and possible conditions (such as voluntary opt-in or campaign finance reforms) before any future ordinance is reintroduced.
What happens next: the item was denied 9-0; councilmembers asked staff to provide comparative data and cost options should the matter be revived at a later date.
